BACKGROUND: The abundance of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) and the routine use of quadruple stainings in flow cytometry allow stepwise analysis of bone marrow (BM) samples that are suspected for abnormal hematopoiesis. A screening phase that precedes lineage-specific classification phases should be sufficient to assess whether the BM has a normal or abnormal composition, as well as to identify the abnormal differentiation lineage. METHODS: For a quick and easy flow cytometric screening of BM samples, we selected six quadruple immunostainings that cover multiple differentiation stages of the B-cell, monocytic, granulocytic, and erythroid lineages: TdT/CD20/CD19/CD10 and CD45/CD34/CD19/CD22 for B cells, CD34/CD117/CD45/CD13.33 for precursor granulocytic and precursor monocytic cells (myelo/monoblasts), CD14/CD33/CD45/CD34 for monocytic cells, CD16/CD13/CD45/CD11b for granulocytic cells, and CD71/CD235a/CD45/CD117 for erythroid cells. RESULTS: The six quadruple immunostainings reveal specific staining patterns in normal BM, which allow the recognition of various subpopulations of the respective lineages. These staining patterns can be used as a frame of reference for recognition of normal and abnormal BM development. Examples of normal (age-related) variations in these otherwise stable staining patterns are presented together with several abnormal differentiation patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Although alternative immunostainings can be used (e.g., including NK- and T-cell markers), we feel that the selected six stainings represent a comprehensive and easy screening phase for quick identification of shifts in the composition of the studied differentiation lineages, reflecting age-related changes or disease-induced BM abnormalities. Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
BACKGROUND: The abundance of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) and the routine use of quadruple stainings in flow cytometry allow stepwise analysis of bone marrow (BM) samples that are suspected for abnormal hematopoiesis. A screening phase that precedes lineage-specific classification phases should be sufficient to assess whether the BM has a normal or abnormal composition, as well as to identify the abnormal differentiation lineage. METHODS: For a quick and easy flow cytometric screening of BM samples, we selected six quadruple immunostainings that cover multiple differentiation stages of the B-cell, monocytic, granulocytic, and erythroid lineages: TdT/CD20/CD19/CD10 and CD45/CD34/CD19/CD22 for B cells, CD34/CD117/CD45/CD13.33 for precursor granulocytic and precursor monocytic cells (myelo/monoblasts), CD14/CD33/CD45/CD34 for monocytic cells, CD16/CD13/CD45/CD11b for granulocytic cells, and CD71/CD235a/CD45/CD117 for erythroid cells. RESULTS: The six quadruple immunostainings reveal specific staining patterns in normal BM, which allow the recognition of various subpopulations of the respective lineages. These staining patterns can be used as a frame of reference for recognition of normal and abnormal BM development. Examples of normal (age-related) variations in these otherwise stable staining patterns are presented together with several abnormal differentiation patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Although alternative immunostainings can be used (e.g., including NK- and T-cell markers), we feel that the selected six stainings represent a comprehensive and easy screening phase for quick identification of shifts in the composition of the studied differentiation lineages, reflecting age-related changes or disease-induced BM abnormalities. Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Holden T Maecker; Tamsin M Lindstrom; William H Robinson; Paul J Utz; Matthew Hale; Scott D Boyd; Shai S Shen-Orr; C Garrison Fathman Journal: Nat Rev Rheumatol Date: 2012-05-31 Impact factor: 20.543
Authors: J J M van Dongen; L Lhermitte; S Böttcher; J Almeida; V H J van der Velden; J Flores-Montero; A Rawstron; V Asnafi; Q Lécrevisse; P Lucio; E Mejstrikova; T Szczepański; T Kalina; R de Tute; M Brüggemann; L Sedek; M Cullen; A W Langerak; A Mendonça; E Macintyre; M Martin-Ayuso; O Hrusak; M B Vidriales; A Orfao Journal: Leukemia Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Otavio Cabral-Marques; Tabata Takahashi França; Ashraf Al-Sbiei; Lena Friederike Schimke; Taj Ali Khan; Claudia Feriotti; Tania Alves da Costa; Osvaldo Reis Junior; Cristina Worm Weber; Janaíra Fernandes Ferreira; Fabiola Scancetti Tavares; Claudia Valente; Regina Sumiko Watanabe Di Gesu; Asif Iqbal; Gabriela Riemekasten; Gustavo Pessini Amarante-Mendes; José Alexandre Marzagão Barbuto; Beatriz Tavares Costa-Carvalho; Paulo Vitor Soeiro Pereira; Maria J Fernandez-Cabezudo; Vera Lucia Garcia Calich; Luigi D Notarangelo; Troy R Torgerson; Basel K Al-Ramadi; Hans D Ochs; Antonio Condino-Neto Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2018-03-05 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Jairo M Montezuma-Rusca; Susan Moir; Lela Kardava; Clarisa M Buckner; Aaron Louie; Leo J Y Kim; Brian H Santich; Wei Wang; Olivia R Fankuchen; Gabriella Diaz; Janine R Daub; Sergio D Rosenzweig; Tae-Wook Chun; Yuxing Li; Raul C Braylan; Katherine R Calvo; Anthony S Fauci Journal: J Immunol Date: 2015-02-13 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Nicole A Haverland; Matthew Waas; Ioanna Ntai; Theodore Keppel; Rebekah L Gundry; Neil L Kelleher Journal: Proteomics Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 3.984
Authors: Y Takeda; T Kato; H Ito; Y Kurota; A Yamagishi; T Sakurai; A Araki; H Nara; N Tsuchiya; H Asao Journal: Clin Exp Immunol Date: 2016-10-04 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: El-ad David Amir; Kara L Davis; Michelle D Tadmor; Erin F Simonds; Jacob H Levine; Sean C Bendall; Daniel K Shenfeld; Smita Krishnaswamy; Garry P Nolan; Dana Pe'er Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2013-05-19 Impact factor: 54.908